doc.: IEEE b TG4b January 2005 Robert Poor - Ember CorporationSlide 1 Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: TG4b Opening/Closing Report for Monterey, CA Date Submitted: January 2005 Source: Robert Poor, Ember Corporation Contact: Robert Poor, Ember Corporation Voice: , Re: TG4b Opening/Closing Report for January Session Abstract: Opening/Closing Report for the TG4b session in Monterey, Califorenia. Purpose:To provide information on define enhancements and corrections to the existing standard, IEEE Notice:This document has been prepared to assist the IEEE P It is offered as a basis for discussion and is not binding on the contributing individual(s) or organization(s). The material in this document is subject to change in form and content after further study. The contributor(s) reserve(s) the right to add, amend or withdraw material contained herein. Release:The contributor acknowledges and accepts that this contribution becomes the property of IEEE and may be made publicly available by P

doc.: IEEE b TG4b January 2005 Robert Poor - Ember CorporationSlide 2 TG4b Scope This project will define enhancements and corrections to the existing standard. The revised standard will be backward compatible with IEEE P The considered enhancements shall be limited to: A method for shared time-base distribution. Support for new frequency allocations for Europe, China, and Japan. Extension of 2.4GHz derivative modulation yielding higher data rates for the lower frequency bands. Mechanism for communicating the revision level.

doc.: IEEE b TG4b January 2005 Robert Poor - Ember CorporationSlide 3 TG4b Scope (continued) The considered corrections are: Resolving ambiguities. Removing unnecessary complexity, such as making GTS support optional and eliminating BUSY_RX, BUSY_TX, and FORCE_TRX_OFF from the PHY enumerations. Resolving issues such as long association time for non-beacon networks, inflexible security use, adding support for multicast, reducing MAC overhead and MAC header compression.

doc.: IEEE b TG4b January 2005 Robert Poor - Ember CorporationSlide 4 TG4b Purpose The purpose of this revision is to extend the market applicability of IEEE and to remove ambiguities in the standard. Implementations of the current approved standard have revealed potential areas of improvements. Additional frequency bands are being made available in various countries that are attractive for this application space.

doc.: IEEE b TG4b January 2005 Robert Poor - Ember CorporationSlide 5 Meeting Objectives Approve San Antonio Minutes Done. Approve Agenda & Objectives Done. Draft and Edit MAC, PHY, and Security proposals Done.* Prepare Task Group motion for draft approval Done. Prepare Working Group motion for draft approval Done. Plan TG4b Activity & Revise Schedule Done. * Technical content is done, draft text to be integrated before 31 Jan 2005.

doc.: IEEE b TG4b January 2005 Robert Poor - Ember CorporationSlide 6 Major Activity & Documents Since San Antonio: Weekly phone calls for MAC (5), PHY (6), Security, plus many MAC editing calls. MAC comment database: b PHY document: b Security documents: b and b Monterey minutes: b Opening/Closing report: b

doc.: IEEE b TG4b January 2005 Robert Poor - Ember CorporationSlide 7 Instructions to Editing Team Thursday 01/20/05 09:08 Clinton Powell makes a motion to accept document b as the draft for the PHY clause. Ed Callaway is seconding the motion. There is no discussion on the motion. There are no objections to the motion and it passes with unanimous consent. 15:43 Ed Callaway moved that the security editing team finishes the security draft guided by the technical content of documents b and b as amended in the minutes in this session. In cases of conflict between the documents b take precedence. Rene Struik is seconding the motion. The motion passes with unanimous consent. 16:27 Phil Beecher makes a motion that the task group empowers the technical editor to create a draft document that includes the contents of all sub-editor activities as authorized in this session. Robert Cragie is seconding the motion. There is no discussion on the motion. There are no objections to the motion and it passes with unanimous consent.

doc.: IEEE b TG4b January 2005 Robert Poor - Ember CorporationSlide 8 Motion for Letter Ballot On behalf of the working group, I move that the TG4b draft, conditional upon the editor’s completion of the draft following the instructions contained in the minutes document b, be approved and forwarded to the Working Group for letter ballot starting no later than 31 January 2005.

doc.: IEEE b TG4b January 2005 Robert Poor - Ember CorporationSlide 9

doc.: IEEE b TG4b January 2005 Robert Poor - Ember CorporationSlide 10 Membership & Anti-Trust Individual membership –In all IEEE standards meetings, membership is by individual, hence you do not represent a company or organization. Anti-Trust laws –The Anti-Trust laws forbid the discussion of prices within our meetings.

doc.: IEEE b TG4b January 2005 Robert Poor - Ember CorporationSlide Patents IEEE standards may include the known use of essential patents, and patent applications, provided the IEEE receives assurance from the patent holder or applicant with respect to patents essential for compliance with both mandatory and optional portions of the standard. This assurance shall be provided without coercion and prior to approval of the standard (or reaffirmation when a patent becomes known after initial approval of the standard). This assurance shall be a letter that is in the form of either a) A general disclaimer to the effect that the patentee will not enforce any of its present or future patent(s) whose use would be required to implement the proposed IEEE standard against any person or entity using the patent(s) to comply with the standard or b) A statement that a license will be made available without compensation or under reasonable rates, with reasonable terms and conditions that are demonstrably free of any unfair discrimination This assurance shall apply, at a minimum, from the date of the standard's approval to the date of the standard's withdrawal and is irrevocable during that period. IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws on Patents in Standards Approved by IEEE-SA Standards Board –, March 2003, May 2004

doc.: IEEE b TG4b January 2005 Robert Poor - Ember CorporationSlide 12 Inappropriate Topics for IEEE WG Meetings Don’t discuss licensing terms or conditions Don’t discuss product pricing, territorial restrictions or market share Don’t discuss ongoing litigation or threatened litigation Don’t be silent if inappropriate topics are discussed… do formally object. If you have questions, contact the IEEE Patent Committee Administrator at Approved by IEEE-SA Standards Board – December 2002

doc.: IEEE b TG4b January 2005 Robert Poor - Ember CorporationSlide 13 Copyright Under the current US copyright law — the author of information is deemed to own the copyright from the moment of creation The IEEE Bylaws require copyright of all material to be held by the IEEE –Must consult with IEEE for re-use of copyright material The IEEE Standards accomplishes transfer of copyright ownership through the Project Authorization Request (PAR) process

doc.: IEEE b TG4b January 2005 Robert Poor - Ember CorporationSlide 14 Chair’s Role pdfhttp://ieee802.org/Mike_Spring_Article_on_Stds_Process. pdf …the chairperson of the working group is key to what and how fast a standard is produced. The chair of the committee acts as a facilitator with little power to legislate. The chair must be knowledgeable about the subject but also know how a standard may be used by various segments of the industry. A chairperson should be a leader-diplomat-observer, in equal proportions. Also, the chairperson should not be a doer, perfectionist or obstructionist. This is consistent with the view of the chairperson as a skilled leader with strong negotiation skills who delegates.

doc.: IEEE b TG4b January 2005 Robert Poor - Ember CorporationSlide 15 Chair’s Role Meta-issues When there are two valid points in opposition, the strategy is to move the group away from polarity. This can be done by raising the meta-issue—“Does the group believe that a decision needs to be made?”. Agreement on that question focuses the group on reaching consensus to resolve the impasse. What it Ain’t Educate members on what standards are and are not! Creeping Featurism Avoid add-ons, new features that would be “nice” as opposed to “necessary”—features that get added after the die has been cast. Two Hats When the chair needs to shift from a management focus to make a technical point, put on a baseball cap with the company logo and move from the head of the table to another seat, signifying that he now wishes to be seen as taking a “company” position on a particular issue. This makes it very clear where he stands and eliminates confusion about what role he is fulfilling at the time. When at the chair’s position, he is perceived as wearing the chairs’ hat by default. The Duelists When two individuals are vehemently opposed or dead-locked on an issue and it appears to be disrupting the group process, send them off to a separate room. The winner will come back to present their position which has been “forged under fire”. A similar suggestion would have the chair form ad hoc groups out of parties in conflict forcing disputing stakeholders together and charging them with resolving their disagreement as a precondition to the committee proceeding with development of the standard. This places the burden on the antagonists to subordinate their individual differences to that of the group.

doc.: IEEE b TG4b January 2005 Robert Poor - Ember CorporationSlide 16

doc.: IEEE b TG4b January 2005 Robert Poor - Ember CorporationSlide 17 TG4b Schedule